On Mon, 2019-11-25 at 20:59 +0100, Geert Stappers wrote:
> 
> Please confirm that each of the above `dig` commands
> was **all** done at `host.example.com`

Yes, of course.

> Please, pretty please, say if I missed that `dig example.com. ns` was
> done on two different machines.

No it was not.  It would not be a valid bug report if it were.

> Acknowledge. Please repeat the original test[1] with
> 
> dig +short @127.0.0.1 example.com. ns
> dig +short @127.0.0.1 mail.example.com.
> dig +short @127.0.0.1 example.com. ns

You can see from the previous dig results that they were all
@127.0.0.1.  All reported:

;; SERVER: 127.0.0.1#53(127.0.0.1)

in their trailer.

In any case:

# dig +short @127.0.0.1 example.com. ns
server.example.com.
# dig +short @127.0.0.1 mail.example.com.
9.1.1.18
# dig +short @127.0.0.1 interlinx.bc.ca. ns
server.example.ca.
ns1.he.net.
ns2.he.net.
ns3.he.net.
ns4.he.net.
ns5.he.net.

Cheers,
b.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

_______________________________________________
Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list
Dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk
http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss

Reply via email to